I'm amused! (You got my vote for way above for your admission on that other thread, dg. Not many people would have the courage or honor to do
what you did.)

People of the opposing party always fear something like this will happen, and it never does. FDR is the only president to sucessfully run for a term
beyond the second, though many had tried before him. During the Clinton years, I feared he would bomb some country and declare a national state of
emergency and negate the election. Didn't happen. I'm sure people thought the same things about Reagan, but I was only 9 at the time I don't know
for sure.

Let not your heart be troubled, my friend. Republicans should know that if this ammendment were repealed, Bill Clinton would be running against GW,
and Bill would flatten him. The guy is just too charismatic, knows how to play the politics game, and is a fantastic public speaker.

ammendments can't be repealed. A new one has to be made to 'override' it.

bush is not eligible for a nother term, and the republicans aren't going to remove that ammendment just so he can run again.

Im sure it can be overridden. If there is a good enough reason to do so it will happen. If the Bush family feels that it is absolutely necessary to
stay in power because of unforseen circumstances they will find a way. Just look at the 2000 election.

Originally posted by Amuk
If memory serves me correct they tried the same thing when Clinton was in office AND when Regan was in office, both a LOT more popular than Bush.

It wont happen

amuk, you never know. There's alot of people out there that still praise him his work in iraq, what is everyone going to do when the 4 years are up?
There's many people out there that think he's the son of jesus or another king arthur. I personally wouldn't be surprised, didn't the majority
vote get him in the second time? Hey we all need another depression right? Food shelters for all!

Bush was elected by the Electoral College in 2000 without incident and on time, as far as the Constitution is concerned nothing unusual
happened.

But, even if your premise was correct, he'd still be unable to run again. If you would bother to read the actual text of the 22nd Amendment:

Amendment XXII - Presidential term limits. Ratified 2/27/1951.

1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as
President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more
than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President, when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall
not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative
from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

2. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of
the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.

I found 3 pages relating to this and now all of them say"Temporary file open error. Display failed.".
Is this a conspiracy?

Luckily for those who didn't get chance to see it here's a copy and paste of the text.
"2. H.J.RES.24 : Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States
to repeal the 22nd amendment to the Constitution.
Sponsor: Rep Hoyer, Steny H. [MD-5] (introduced 2/17/2005) Cosponsors (4)
Committees: House Judiciary
Latest Major Action: 2/17/2005 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to
the House Committee on the Judiciary."

Sure, the constitution can be ammended. There is no way that bush has enough support to do this, even if every republican in the country supports
it, whcih they wont. Heck even vehemently pro-bush supporters wouldn't all support it, becuase it would allow a multi-term democrat to come around.
The limit was created, by republicans, as a reaction to FDRs 4 terms.

Just look at the 2000 election.

Yes, look at it , and you will see that there is not enough support for bush to have this happen. It requires much more than a majority to get an
ammendment. THe 2000 election shows that bush just barely has a majority of electoral votes, let alone popular votes or congressional support.

That means he's only been elected once, in 2004.

Not, it does not. He was not appointed, he was elected. He's been elected twice. This is his last term, short of a constitutional ammendment that
removes presidential terms limits.

but if the republicans decide to argue the matter before the supreme court

Its not something that the Supreme Court has jurisdiction over. They interpret constiutional law, the president administers the government, and
congress creates that laws. Only congress, via an ammendment, can give bush a third term.

Found it, again.

There is nothing that comes up if you search that term.
Yes, there wouldn't be anything stopping him if there was an ammendment to the constitution, because it'd be perfectly legal. THere were no
presidental term limits by law until after FDR had 4 consecutive presidencies.

It is house resolution 9 "H.J.RES.9", it was introduced by Congressman Serrano, he's a democrat from NY. here is the text

JOINT RESOLUTION
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on
the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring
therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and
purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its
submission for ratification:

`Article--

`The twenty-second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.'.

It was proposed in january of this year, its sitting in comitee, ie it not going to happen.

edit:
As far as I can tell its working now, but the link might be something created on your own computer when you search that bill data-base. It may not be
viewable on other computers and may even 'die' after a while, I don't know. I searched under the text 'Twenty-second Ammendment' in that
database and got this bill.

You must have to be quick to catch them.
No I didn't make them on my computer, but luckily for you I saved them in HTM.
If anyone can let me know the best place to host them Ill put them up.
I'm not suggesting they will get in I was just pointing out that there was reference to the 22nd ammendment made on the 2/17/2005.
I can't explain why they seem to keep moving the pages.
There's a list of 4 cosponsors also republican.

2/3rd's of both houses of Congress were to vote for it...... then
3/4 of all the states were to ratify it.

While possible, I highly doubt that you could get 2/3's of an almost equally split highly partisan congress to agree to it, especially if it meant
that Bush could be re-elected.

But even if you could somehow get congress to pass the bill, it still would not be an amendment yet, you would need to somehow get 38 of the 50 states
legislatures to ratify it. Considering how split the country is, good luck with that as well.

Quite frankly, in todays political climate, I just don't see it happening. Especially if it meant that Bush could be elected to a third term.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.